It's worse than that. A major problem would be simply the names of the packages. For example, on Fedora, the pango-* rpms depend on glib2-*. pango-devel would depend on glib2-devel. In Debian, they call the packages pango-dev and glib-2-dev or something. Package manager don't just use lists of provided resources to resolve dependencies; they also use package names.
I haven't read much of the documentation on this project, but the only way it would work would be to implement their own (yet another) package management system and just use rpms debs, etc as sources, eliminating name-based dependencies.
Either way I don't see a huge advantage for existing distributions. I'd prefer a very smart alien (maybe with canonical package names and conversion rules) for converting say from fedora to debian and vice versa.
Getting more and more accurate clocks is causing a very interesting (and potentially deadly) problem. Every year, the earth rotates slower and slower. I believe that currently we add a couple of leap seconds every year. Unfortunately the world has not completely standardized on when and how these leaps seconds are to be inserted. This leads to a problem where applications that require very accurate time (say airplanes) can potentially be different by a number of seconds. If airplane one has already adjusted time, airplane B has not, but the controller has, then the controller may order a plane to move to a certain position at a certain time which could cause an accident. This is not unlike the great train schedule disasters of the 1800s before time zones were standardized. There has already been one near miss that I've heard of because of this leap second problem.
In the past this wasn't a problem because timepieces had to be adjusted regularly. Obviously having accurate clocks is a good idea, so long as we can have a world standard for adjusting them.
Actually IsNot exists in visual basic because BASIC has no logical boolean operators. In BASIC all operators are always arithmatic. The IsNot operator is provided so that any non-zero value evaluated to -1 (IsNot is a function) and zero to 0. This makes it so you can use arithmatic boolean operators and they have the same effect as if they were logical. Other operators that help out include IsTrue and IsFalse.
Say what you will about C++ being slower and more bloated than C, but I think this is a huge leap forward. I doubt Linus will accept it anytime soon as an official patch, though. If they have succeeded in making exceptions quick, I think C++ has a real place in the kernel. C++ offers the ability to have better type safety and more modular apis and interfaces to the kernel. For example being able to develop a new device driver inheriting from a nice base class is a good idea.
Anyway, this is a neat hack and I look forward to seeing what comes of it.
Maybe I'm wrong here, but it doesn't sound like AMD would be using the peltier as a replacement for the fan and heatsink, but rather building in a peltier into the silicon itself to pump the heat out of the CPU core itself faster, so that the heatsink and cooling fan on top can keep the core cooled. As someone mentioned, as we increase the density of the cpu die itself, the thermal density is also decreased and thus the problem becomes getting the heat from the core of the silicon wafer out to the outside of the chip or wafer itself. If we put peltier material into the wafer, we can electronically pump this heat to the surface where traditional cooling devices can disappate it into the air
Are there any hacks out there that would grab just one application's window? I would love that functionality. That would make vnc almost a citrix server, except that it could only handle one user at a time.
Except that some spyware creeps in without any user intervention. I have one user right now with spyware on her computer and she has downloaded nothing, and uses Firefox. I think that while she was updating her service packs, her machine was compromised remotely to install the spy software.
>From what I hear of the requirements to run X, it sounds like it has bloated terribly since the old 486 / 1MB graphics card days.
Nope. Not so. X nowadays can run on the tiniest devices. Obviously you won't want to run gnome, or even XFCE. However, the kdrive x server combined with matchbox would work good on a tv screen. X+matchbox is about 2mb on disk. Add in the gpe libraries and you get another 4 or 5 mb. Will definitely run comfortably on a pentium 133 or even slower.
I don't need to justify my purchase to anyone. Unlike my Windows friends who have to justify everything to me. "Got a biggin 9000 graphic accelerator. Windows XP is almost smooth!" Since Apples cost about the same as an equivalent windows pc, why not go buy one and see how it works.
Companies could learn a lot by finding out what makes Apple's customers so loyal. Even a monopolist like MS could be incredibly well liked and produce high quality products if they'd learn a thing or too.
As Lisa says, the analogy is "apt! apt! I tell you!"
No kidding. Why the heck didn't the guy just go and buy his son the iMac? I mean the kid wanted the iMac, not some more expensive wannabe ripoff. What these copycats fail to realize is that there's more to Apple's products than simply looks. There's quality and OS X. The hippee thing is more like taking a toyota and putting a cheap fiberglass Farari body on it. May look pretty from a distance, but up close it will look like a cheap imitation (cheapness is the hallmark of the Wintel world) that still drives like a toyota.
I doubt Apple will lose any sleep over this one.
On the other hand, a sub-1000 dollar unit like that would make a nice linux terminal.
Yeah it is idiocy. But rather than remove the waste from earth (thereby depleting earth's resources) we should find a way to get it down back into the core where it will be recycled. I mean where do they think we get radioactive minerals from in the first place.
Well all batteries do a terrible job of capturing the charging energy. The important thing is how much total energy it can store, and how efficiently it can release it. Losing energy during the charging conversion process is really unimportant.
What are you talking about? Gnome is awful. It's freaky looking, it doesn't follow the conventions just about everyone else is following, its configuration tools are rotten, its maintainers are copying Microsoft's.Net initiative, which is going to be crushed like a bug the instant Bill Gates tires of them and opens up his patent portfolio... I mean, there are so many things wrong with Gnome, where do I start?
Freaky looking, eh? There's a scientific observation for you. As for following conventions no one else uses, well, you are just plain wrong. I love OS X and Gnome. I hate KDE and Windows. So in one sense you are right. KDE follows the same conventions as Windows and drives me crazy. I mean the button order that KDE users love and that MS created is weird. Gnome and OS X both follow a much more rigid set of guidelines that ultimately present a much cleaner and more professional look.
I am exceedingly glad that KDE dumped the Keramik widget set as its default. That was one of the most childish and unprofessional widget sets ever devised. I used to cringe when professional aqauntances would try out linux and load up KDE with that widget set (SuSE).
I see KDE as a very cool tool. It's customizability is second to none. That's what the gentoo users want (although all gentoo users I know use fluxbox -- maybe that's why they think their distro is so blazingly fast).
In short, there is no evidence that Gnome sucks more or less than KDE sucks. The old patent argument is tiring. I mean Gnome is not about.NET (that's a separate initiative). If MS really tries to start utilizing patents, don't think for a minute that KDE is somehow safe because they don't integrate with Mono. KDE could also be crushed just as easily by your arguments. Personally I don't see things so bleakly. Gnome is evolving nicely. So is KDE. As long as they can work together, then I'll be happy.
Internet Explorer. Again, I use FireFox as my browser of choice, but most folks use MSIE, so if you're building a site, it is critical that you test your work in MSIE. VPC again? For this one, the inherant intolerable slowness of VPC isn't a critical issue, since you're very likely not to be doing anything w/ MSIE save testing your site in it.
Well, since IE for Mac is a completely different animal than IE for Windows, if you are a web developer on a Mac, you'll still need access to a Windows machine with IE for testing. So that point is basically a non-issue.
Also, I don't know what kind of crap you're talking about with VPC, but it really isn't that slow on anything over a gHz with plenty of ram. I recommend 1 gig of ram if you want to run VPC. Then you can give at least 384 mb to it.
VPC appears to run (raw execution speed) at about 1/2 to 2/3 the speed I expect it to run on my PC destop. I won't give you a mHz rating, because Windows XP for me runs at the exact same speed on every machine from 1 gHz on up to 4 gHz, doing daily work. VPC takes the most performance hit on the I/O layer, because of the extra layer of abstraction.
Thus the reason why VPC seems slow to some people is they are starving it for RAM, causing Windows to dip into it's swap file, which is very slow because it's going through another layer before it hits the disk. If you were serious about running VPC (and actually need it), you'd probably want at least 1 gig of ram for win xp alone (to stop swapping), and 512 to 1 gig for OS/X.
Haha. That's funny. The real link should be http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FOSS. If you search for FLOSS, you get redirected to FOSS, which is essentially the same thing, except that some people like to use "Libre" to help indentify the concept of "free as in speech."
This is indeed a cool development. I'd love to run Linux on my powerook, but without Nvidia support, I don't get suspend or any form of power management. Nor do I get wireless (dang broadcom). Being able to run yellowdog or fedora PPC inside a virtual machine would be great. Of course, there isn't much that Linux can do that OS X can't.
Amen. I'm still waiting for Fedora Core to do this. I think it's stupid to type in the root password for things like update when sudo would be so much better.
Apparently as SELinux gets integrated into the kernel, even sudo will be unnecessary. Fedora Core is working on this integration. It will be interesting to see how it works out.
There is nothing wrong with X-Windows that can't be fixed in an elegant way that provides a path for future flexibility, while still maintaining the key killer features of X11: network transparency (per-window) and backwards compatibility. I think it's pretty cool I can remote login into an ancient unix machine and run an old motif app on my x.org 6.8.1 linux box with translucency and shadows. Sure you can always run an X11 thunk layer on top of the window system de jour, but invariably, GUI systems end up re-implementing many things X has always had. Windows just added network transparency recently in the form of terminal services (so don't tell me no one uses it; if they didn't demand such things, MS wouldn't have put them in windows).
You are making falacious logical deductions based on facts that may or may not be related. If we could monitor this ozone hole for a hundred years before and after this event, then we could argue with some certaintly whether there was a connection.
The Montreal Protocol banning CFCs was not based on science. It was based on a media scare campaign initiated by people who had agendas. There's no evidence that CFCs were really bad, nor that my life is being saved without them. Essentially the full scientific review process with global scientific consensus never happened. So although it may be true, until this happens, it is junk science.
I've considering selecting a new repository system in the near future. I need to support a web site, as well as programming projects. I read an article recently that quoted the creator of Arch as saying that Subversion sucked because it was designed wrong. Of course he neglected to give any evidence of this. For those that have used both, which ultimate was the better choice, if any?
Hmm. Say anything remotely anti-apple and the moderators jump all over you! Wow. That comment is most certainly not a troll.
Thanks for those who talked about how the knob controls work (which, they are right in pointing out, is not immediately intuitive; there is a slight learning curve), rather than just blindly modding down.
Both Gtk and Qt are actually sad examples of this: not only does their functionality suffer from their choice of language (each has invented their own object models), their resource requirements are embarrassingly bad.
This is a baseless argument. What evidence do you have that GTK (I have no experience with QT) is a poorly designed object framework? In actuality I find it a superbly well-designed framework that translates *very* well into these other object-oriented languages like C#, Java, and C++. Python and Perl also have bindings that are very comfortable within their own object framework.
The UI looks quite complicated. I imagine that means there is a lot flexibility at your fingertips. I wonder, though, at the wisdom of making computer user interfaces attempt to mimick the traditional analog interfaces. Knobs that you turn, for example, are pretty stupid, yet the screenshots for Logic Pro show loads of such controls. With a wheel mouse i suppose turning the knobs is easy, but apple has only one button from the factory. Will this UI make it in the User Interface Hall of Shame?
Slashdot Mirror
It's worse than that. A major problem would be simply the names of the packages. For example, on Fedora, the pango-* rpms depend on glib2-*. pango-devel would depend on glib2-devel. In Debian, they call the packages pango-dev and glib-2-dev or something. Package manager don't just use lists of provided resources to resolve dependencies; they also use package names.
I haven't read much of the documentation on this project, but the only way it would work would be to implement their own (yet another) package management system and just use rpms debs, etc as sources, eliminating name-based dependencies.
Either way I don't see a huge advantage for existing distributions. I'd prefer a very smart alien (maybe with canonical package names and conversion rules) for converting say from fedora to debian and vice versa.
Getting more and more accurate clocks is causing a very interesting (and potentially deadly) problem. Every year, the earth rotates slower and slower. I believe that currently we add a couple of leap seconds every year. Unfortunately the world has not completely standardized on when and how these leaps seconds are to be inserted. This leads to a problem where applications that require very accurate time (say airplanes) can potentially be different by a number of seconds. If airplane one has already adjusted time, airplane B has not, but the controller has, then the controller may order a plane to move to a certain position at a certain time which could cause an accident. This is not unlike the great train schedule disasters of the 1800s before time zones were standardized. There has already been one near miss that I've heard of because of this leap second problem.
In the past this wasn't a problem because timepieces had to be adjusted regularly. Obviously having accurate clocks is a good idea, so long as we can have a world standard for adjusting them.
Actually IsNot exists in visual basic because BASIC has no logical boolean operators. In BASIC all operators are always arithmatic. The IsNot operator is provided so that any non-zero value evaluated to -1 (IsNot is a function) and zero to 0. This makes it so you can use arithmatic boolean operators and they have the same effect as if they were logical. Other operators that help out include IsTrue and IsFalse.
Well, using fuse of lufs you could. But it's not as flexible. For instance, password handling and so forth.
Say what you will about C++ being slower and more bloated than C, but I think this is a huge leap forward. I doubt Linus will accept it anytime soon as an official patch, though. If they have succeeded in making exceptions quick, I think C++ has a real place in the kernel. C++ offers the ability to have better type safety and more modular apis and interfaces to the kernel. For example being able to develop a new device driver inheriting from a nice base class is a good idea.
Anyway, this is a neat hack and I look forward to seeing what comes of it.
Maybe I'm wrong here, but it doesn't sound like AMD would be using the peltier as a replacement for the fan and heatsink, but rather building in a peltier into the silicon itself to pump the heat out of the CPU core itself faster, so that the heatsink and cooling fan on top can keep the core cooled. As someone mentioned, as we increase the density of the cpu die itself, the thermal density is also decreased and thus the problem becomes getting the heat from the core of the silicon wafer out to the outside of the chip or wafer itself. If we put peltier material into the wafer, we can electronically pump this heat to the surface where traditional cooling devices can disappate it into the air
Are there any hacks out there that would grab just one application's window? I would love that functionality. That would make vnc almost a citrix server, except that it could only handle one user at a time.
Except that some spyware creeps in without any user intervention. I have one user right now with spyware on her computer and she has downloaded nothing, and uses Firefox. I think that while she was updating her service packs, her machine was compromised remotely to install the spy software.
>From what I hear of the requirements to run X, it sounds like it has bloated terribly since the old 486 / 1MB graphics card days.
Nope. Not so. X nowadays can run on the tiniest devices. Obviously you won't want to run gnome, or even XFCE. However, the kdrive x server combined with matchbox would work good on a tv screen. X+matchbox is about 2mb on disk. Add in the gpe libraries and you get another 4 or 5 mb. Will definitely run comfortably on a pentium 133 or even slower.
I don't need to justify my purchase to anyone. Unlike my Windows friends who have to justify everything to me. "Got a biggin 9000 graphic accelerator. Windows XP is almost smooth!" Since Apples cost about the same as an equivalent windows pc, why not go buy one and see how it works.
Companies could learn a lot by finding out what makes Apple's customers so loyal. Even a monopolist like MS could be incredibly well liked and produce high quality products if they'd learn a thing or too.
As Lisa says, the analogy is "apt! apt! I tell you!"
No kidding. Why the heck didn't the guy just go and buy his son the iMac? I mean the kid wanted the iMac, not some more expensive wannabe ripoff. What these copycats fail to realize is that there's more to Apple's products than simply looks. There's quality and OS X. The hippee thing is more like taking a toyota and putting a cheap fiberglass Farari body on it. May look pretty from a distance, but up close it will look like a cheap imitation (cheapness is the hallmark of the Wintel world) that still drives like a toyota.
I doubt Apple will lose any sleep over this one.
On the other hand, a sub-1000 dollar unit like that would make a nice linux terminal.
Yeah it is idiocy. But rather than remove the waste from earth (thereby depleting earth's resources) we should find a way to get it down back into the core where it will be recycled. I mean where do they think we get radioactive minerals from in the first place.
Well all batteries do a terrible job of capturing the charging energy. The important thing is how much total energy it can store, and how efficiently it can release it. Losing energy during the charging conversion process is really unimportant.
What are you talking about? Gnome is awful. It's freaky looking, it doesn't follow the conventions just about everyone else is following, its configuration tools are rotten, its maintainers are copying Microsoft's .Net initiative, which is going to be crushed like a bug the instant Bill Gates tires of them and opens up his patent portfolio... I mean, there are so many things wrong with Gnome, where do I start?
.NET (that's a separate initiative). If MS really tries to start utilizing patents, don't think for a minute that KDE is somehow safe because they don't integrate with Mono. KDE could also be crushed just as easily by your arguments. Personally I don't see things so bleakly. Gnome is evolving nicely. So is KDE. As long as they can work together, then I'll be happy.
Freaky looking, eh? There's a scientific observation for you. As for following conventions no one else uses, well, you are just plain wrong. I love OS X and Gnome. I hate KDE and Windows. So in one sense you are right. KDE follows the same conventions as Windows and drives me crazy. I mean the button order that KDE users love and that MS created is weird. Gnome and OS X both follow a much more rigid set of guidelines that ultimately present a much cleaner and more professional look.
I am exceedingly glad that KDE dumped the Keramik widget set as its default. That was one of the most childish and unprofessional widget sets ever devised. I used to cringe when professional aqauntances would try out linux and load up KDE with that widget set (SuSE).
I see KDE as a very cool tool. It's customizability is second to none. That's what the gentoo users want (although all gentoo users I know use fluxbox -- maybe that's why they think their distro is so blazingly fast).
In short, there is no evidence that Gnome sucks more or less than KDE sucks. The old patent argument is tiring. I mean Gnome is not about
Internet Explorer. Again, I use FireFox as my browser of choice, but most folks use MSIE, so if you're building a site, it is critical that you test your work in MSIE. VPC again? For this one, the inherant intolerable slowness of VPC isn't a critical issue, since you're very likely not to be doing anything w/ MSIE save testing your site in it.
Well, since IE for Mac is a completely different animal than IE for Windows, if you are a web developer on a Mac, you'll still need access to a Windows machine with IE for testing. So that point is basically a non-issue.
Also, I don't know what kind of crap you're talking about with VPC, but it really isn't that slow on anything over a gHz with plenty of ram. I recommend 1 gig of ram if you want to run VPC. Then you can give at least 384 mb to it.
VPC appears to run (raw execution speed) at about 1/2 to 2/3 the speed I expect it to run on my PC destop. I won't give you a mHz rating, because Windows XP for me runs at the exact same speed on every machine from 1 gHz on up to 4 gHz, doing daily work. VPC takes the most performance hit on the I/O layer, because of the extra layer of abstraction.
Thus the reason why VPC seems slow to some people is they are starving it for RAM, causing Windows to dip into it's swap file, which is very slow because it's going through another layer before it hits the disk. If you were serious about running VPC (and actually need it), you'd probably want at least 1 gig of ram for win xp alone (to stop swapping), and 512 to 1 gig for OS/X.
Haha. That's funny. The real link should be http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FOSS. If you search for FLOSS, you get redirected to FOSS, which is essentially the same thing, except that some people like to use "Libre" to help indentify the concept of "free as in speech."
Way to go moderators!
Yes. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FLOSS.
This is indeed a cool development. I'd love to run Linux on my powerook, but without Nvidia support, I don't get suspend or any form of power management. Nor do I get wireless (dang broadcom). Being able to run yellowdog or fedora PPC inside a virtual machine would be great. Of course, there isn't much that Linux can do that OS X can't.
Amen. I'm still waiting for Fedora Core to do this. I think it's stupid to type in the root password for things like update when sudo would be so much better.
Apparently as SELinux gets integrated into the kernel, even sudo will be unnecessary. Fedora Core is working on this integration. It will be interesting to see how it works out.
I'll help this flood along.
There is nothing wrong with X-Windows that can't be fixed in an elegant way that provides a path for future flexibility, while still maintaining the key killer features of X11: network transparency (per-window) and backwards compatibility. I think it's pretty cool I can remote login into an ancient unix machine and run an old motif app on my x.org 6.8.1 linux box with translucency and shadows. Sure you can always run an X11 thunk layer on top of the window system de jour, but invariably, GUI systems end up re-implementing many things X has always had. Windows just added network transparency recently in the form of terminal services (so don't tell me no one uses it; if they didn't demand such things, MS wouldn't have put them in windows).
You are making falacious logical deductions based on facts that may or may not be related. If we could monitor this ozone hole for a hundred years before and after this event, then we could argue with some certaintly whether there was a connection.
The Montreal Protocol banning CFCs was not based on science. It was based on a media scare campaign initiated by people who had agendas. There's no evidence that CFCs were really bad, nor that my life is being saved without them. Essentially the full scientific review process with global scientific consensus never happened. So although it may be true, until this happens, it is junk science.
I've considering selecting a new repository system in the near future. I need to support a web site, as well as programming projects. I read an article recently that quoted the creator of Arch as saying that Subversion sucked because it was designed wrong. Of course he neglected to give any evidence of this. For those that have used both, which ultimate was the better choice, if any?
Hmm. Say anything remotely anti-apple and the moderators jump all over you! Wow. That comment is most certainly not a troll.
Thanks for those who talked about how the knob controls work (which, they are right in pointing out, is not immediately intuitive; there is a slight learning curve), rather than just blindly modding down.
Both Gtk and Qt are actually sad examples of this: not only does their functionality suffer from their choice of language (each has invented their own object models), their resource requirements are embarrassingly bad.
This is a baseless argument. What evidence do you have that GTK (I have no experience with QT) is a poorly designed object framework? In actuality I find it a superbly well-designed framework that translates *very* well into these other object-oriented languages like C#, Java, and C++. Python and Perl also have bindings that are very comfortable within their own object framework.
The UI looks quite complicated. I imagine that means there is a lot flexibility at your fingertips. I wonder, though, at the wisdom of making computer user interfaces attempt to mimick the traditional analog interfaces. Knobs that you turn, for example, are pretty stupid, yet the screenshots for Logic Pro show loads of such controls. With a wheel mouse i suppose turning the knobs is easy, but apple has only one button from the factory. Will this UI make it in the User Interface Hall of Shame?